Section 43(5)(d) of the Income Tax Act

Income-tax Act, 2025: ss.39, 41

Section 43(5)(d) falls under section 43 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, which corresponds to section 39 (Computation of actual cost) and section 41 (Written down value of depreciable asset) of the Income-tax Act, 2025.

Read section 39 of the 2025 ActRead section 41 of the 2025 Act

Correspondence checked against the ICAI tabular mapping of the two Acts and the BharatTax.co section commentary.

The decision most relied on for Section 43(5)(d) is Varsha Corporation Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax (OSD) (45 Taxmann.com 352), cited in 3 of the 60 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 43(5)(d)

Varsha Corporation Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax (OSD)
45 Taxmann.com 352 · 2014 · ITAT
3
citing judgments

Judgments on Section 43(5)(d)

The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1)(2), Ahmedabad vs. M/S. Dsons Projects Pvt. Ltd., Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2016/AHD/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad04 Sept 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Mahavir Prasad, Judicial Memebr

For Appellant: Shri Mudit Nagpal, Sr. D.R
Section 43Section 43(5)Section 43(5)(d)

Rsr Best Commodities P Ltd., Chennai vs. ITO, Chennai

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes as indicated herein above

ITA 1287/CHNY/2017[2006-2007]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 May 2018AY 2006-2007

Bench: Shri A.Mohan Alankamony & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

For Appellant: Shri K. Ravi, JCITFor Respondent: 08.03.2018
Section 14Section 143(1)Section 144Section 145Section 147Section 148Section 40Section 43(5)(d)

Chanchal Kumar Ash, North 24 Parganas vs. D.C.I.T Cir - 50, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 774/KOL/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 Apr 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Aby. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No. 774/Kol/2013 Assessment Year : 2007-08 Chanchal Kumar Ash -Vs- Dcit, Circle-50, Kolkata [Pan: Acxpa 6531 H] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Anikesh Banerjee, ARFor Respondent: Shri R.P. Neogi, Addl. CIT
Section 143(3)Section 43(5)(d)Section 68

Poonam Bhotika, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward 43(1), Kolkata

In the result, assessee’s appeal stands allowed

ITA 665/KOL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata04 Apr 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year :2012-13 Poonam Bhotika V/S. Income Tax Officer, 161/1 M.G. Road, Rom Wrd-43(1), 3, Govt. No.26, Kolkata-700 007 Place (W), [Pan No.Aqsps 2982 D] Kolkata-700 001 .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Shri S.M. Surana, Advocate अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri G. Hangshing, Cit-Dr ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 25-01-2018 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 04-04-2018 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement आदेश /O R D E R Per Waseem Ahmed:- The Assessee Has Filed This Appeal Disputing The Order Of Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax-15, Kolkata Passed U/S 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) Dated 22.03.2017 By Which The Ld. Pr. Cit Set Aside The Assessment Order Dated 02.03.2015 Passed U/S 143(3) Of The Act For Assessment Year 2012-13 With A Direction To Re-Do The Assessment In Respect Of Issue Therein. The Ground Raised By The Assessee In The Memo Of Appeal Filed With The Tribunal Read As Under:- “1. That The Commissioner Of Income-Tax,Kolkata-15 Is Not Justified Set Aside The Assessment Order For The Assessment Year 2012-13 Dated 02.03.2015 Passed By The Ito Ward-43(1), Kolkata Is Found To Be Erroneous & Prejudicial To The Interest Of Revenue On The Ground That The Allowability Of Loss In Future Option As An Admissible Business Expenditure Remained To Be Seen By The Ao During The Assessment Proceedings Although Prime Facie Evidence Against Its Allowability Was

Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 263Section 43(5)(d)

ACIT, Circle-12(2), Kol, Kolkata vs. M/S Tirupati Awas(P) Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1560/KOL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Mar 2018AY 2011-12
Section 132Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 43(5)(d)

Rane Brake Linings Limited, Chennai vs. ITO (OSD), Chennai

In the result the Revenue’s appeal in ITA Nos

ITA 1596/CHNY/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai15 Feb 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A.Mohan Alankamony

For Respondent: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, Advocate
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250(6)Section 40Section 9(1)(vii)

Rane Brake Linings Limited, Chennai vs. ACIT, Chennai

In the result the Revenue’s appeal in ITA Nos

ITA 1595/CHNY/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai15 Feb 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A.Mohan Alankamony

For Respondent: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, Advocate
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250(6)Section 40Section 9(1)(vii)

Rane Brake Linings Limited, Chennai vs. ACIT, Chennai

In the result the Revenue’s appeal in ITA Nos

ITA 1594/CHNY/2014[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai15 Feb 2018AY 2001-02

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A.Mohan Alankamony

For Respondent: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, Advocate
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250(6)Section 40Section 9(1)(vii)

Rane Brake Linings Limited, Chennai vs. ITO (OSD), Chennai

In the result the Revenue’s appeal in ITA Nos

ITA 1593/CHNY/2014[1999-2000]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai15 Feb 2018AY 1999-2000

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A.Mohan Alankamony

For Respondent: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, Advocate
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250(6)Section 40Section 9(1)(vii)

DCIT, Chennai vs. Rane Brake Lining Ltd., Chennai

In the result the Revenue’s appeal in ITA Nos

ITA 1528/CHNY/2014[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai15 Feb 2018AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A.Mohan Alankamony

For Respondent: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, Advocate
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250(6)Section 40Section 9(1)(vii)

DCIT, Chennai vs. Rane Brake Lining Ltd., Chennai

In the result the Revenue’s appeal in ITA Nos

ITA 1527/CHNY/2014[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai15 Feb 2018AY 2009-2010

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A.Mohan Alankamony

For Respondent: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, Advocate
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250(6)Section 40Section 9(1)(vii)

ITO, WD -3(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Arandi Investments Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 2330/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Jan 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 2330/Mum/2016 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Ito, Ward-3(1)(1), M/S. Arandi Investments Pvt. Ltd. बनाम/ Room No. 666, 6Th Floor, 408, Tulsiyani Chambers, Aayakar Bhavan, M. K. Road, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400 021 Vs. Mumbai-400 020 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aabca 1755 C (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant By : Shri M. V. Rajguru ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : None सुनवाई क" तार"ख / : 24.10.2017 Date Of Hearing घोषणा क" तार"ख / : 05.01.2018 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Shamim Yahya, A. M.: This Appeal By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Dated 19.01.2016 & Pertains To The Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2011-12. 2. The Grounds Of Appeal Read As Under: 1. "On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Directing That The Loss Of Rs.2,46,31,762/- On Account Of Derivative Trading Cannot Be Treated As Speculation Loss & Failed To Appreciate That The Case Of The Assessee Squarely Falls Within Ambit Of Explanation To S.73 Of The I.T. Act"

For Appellant: Shri M. V. RajguruFor Respondent: None
Section 14ASection 2Section 43(5)(d)Section 72Section 73

ITO, Corporate Ward-2(1), Chennai vs. Euroflora Bioland Pvt Ltd, Chennai

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2124/CHNY/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Dec 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari

For Appellant: Mr.S.Sridhar, AdvocateFor Respondent: 16.11.2017
Section 73Section 73(1)

Jaswant J Shah, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Cen Cir 32, Mumbai

In the result appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 2599/MUM/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 May 2017AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm

Section 127Section 127(3)Section 133ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263

Jaswant J Shah, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Cen Cir 32, Mumbai

In the result appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 2598/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 May 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm

Section 127Section 127(3)Section 133ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263

ITO, New Delhi vs. Shri Vikramendra Prasad Bhalla, New Delhi

In the result ground No. 2 of the appeal of the revenue is allowed with above direction

ITA 517/DEL/2011[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Feb 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri H.S.Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishiito, Vikramendra Prasad Bhalla, Ward-7(4), Room No. 305, C-2, Greater Kailash Vs. Cr Building, New Delhi Enclave-I, New Delhi Pan:Aanpb8241P (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. KVSR Krishna, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Umesh Chand Dubey, Sr. DR
Section 143Section 144Section 147Section 148

M/S Akanksha Viniyog Ltd vs. C.I.T. I, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1713/KOL/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Jul 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh, Am & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm]

For Appellant: Shri Subash Agarwal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Niraj Kumar, CIT, Sr. DR
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 147Section 14ASection 263

Deepak Soganl, Mumbai vs. DCIT 24(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA N0

ITA 3163/MUM/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Mar 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.3163/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2008-09) Deepak Sogani Dcit-24(1), Pratyaksha बनाम/ A-704, Beverly Park-I Kar Bhawan, Bandra V. Dlf City-2 , Near City Kurla Complex, Centre Mall, M G Road, Bandra(East), Mumbai- Gurgaon, Haryana-122022 400 050 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan :Amfps5138L (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr. Kiran MehtaFor Respondent: Mr. B S Bist, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 234ASection 70Section 70(1)Section 71(2)

D.C.I.T Cir - 3, Kolkata vs. M/S Jaroli Vincom Pvt Ltd, Kolkata

In the result, both appeal of Revenue is dismissed and that of assessee’s CO is dismissed as infructous

ITA 878/KOL/2013[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Dec 2015AY 2008-2009

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 143(3)Section 43(5)Section 43(5)(d)

D.C.I.T Cir - 3, Kolkata vs. M/S Jaroli Vincom Pvt Ltd, Kolkata

In the result, both appeal of Revenue is dismissed and that of assessee’s CO is dismissed as infructous

ITA 877/KOL/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Dec 2015AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 143(3)Section 43(5)Section 43(5)(d)